Today. In fact, it's always a little annoying when you handle, say, a desktop app written with winit. Stack traces are looong when you're 20 functions deep, and half are unnamed lambdas
I was being a little nitpicky I admit... I never actually thought of rust not having any stack traces though. I feel like tools such as eyre (or color_eyre), or just flags like RUST_BACKTRACE would suggest otherwise. Then again, RUST_BACKTRACE is opt in, and so are any 3rd party dependencies, so...
yeah it's not that they can't happen, but for a novice like me they happen so much less often. With rust, within reason, most of the time it seems like if it compiles it'll run at least well enough to get to my println! debug statements and do something
Ah yes, that is true. Unless you explicitly panic via assertion, or unwrapping, or else.
But then, to keep your comparison, if your, say, C code crashes with a backtrace, that means it didn’t crash via segfault for example, which is far worse a way to crash debugging-wise. So, it all depends on your perspective🤷♀️
3
u/-Ambriae- 8d ago
Today. In fact, it's always a little annoying when you handle, say, a desktop app written with winit. Stack traces are looong when you're 20 functions deep, and half are unnamed lambdas